About your Search

20121128
20121128
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10
of a gripping, terrifying spy novel. you got a bioweapons scientist and covert cia officer who is working on developing all sorts of biological weapons that are used in extreme interrogations. some of those interrogations with the bioweapons result in death. and the cia, what does it do about this? the agent who is involved and apparently who has a discomfort with what he's been doing gets his drinks spiked against the cia. it is an extremely convoluted, intriguing case and as you well outlined but is extremely convoluted. it's ten years old, the kennedy assassination and many if not a all -- >> that is my next question. since it is so old, a number of witnesses they would need, some of his fellow officers now in their 20s or 30s would be in their 70s or 80s. not only could they be dead but their minds are certainly not what they used to be which is always a problem in an old case that comes to court after decades. but in this particular case, just getting evidence, you're talking about getting evidence from the cia. >> well the family is having an extremely difficult time getting evidenc
also have the f.b.i. and the secretary of defense and the director of the cia potentially playing that political football game? that would be a huge problem if it were more than just politics. mr. 1: they play hard ball in washington on everything . and unfortunately for susan rice her charm offensive back fire wanted to make nice and made things worse and here is the problem for her going forward. if the administration places her name in confirmation. senators graham and ayotte would place holds on her name. senates have 53 democrats . coming up in january they will have 55 and they need 60. and they need five republicans g to get on board and that could be tough sleeding. >> b <> rian: it is it a almost a joke. mccain and graham and ayote and why are yoa acquiescing . they are flabber gasted after the meeting. we got nothing out of this and i have more questions than before and at 4:00 playing to your point with the cia placed a call and they came out and said acting director morell stated that the cia now says that it deleted the al-qaida references and not the f.b.i.. so they
is that the consulate in benghazi was not an embassy of any typical kind. it really looks like a cia listening station. the kind of security arrangements that were in place were inadequate but it wasn't an embassy. when you build an embassy, there's a formal process about the kinds of materials you use and the setback from the street and the kinds of security measures in place. benghazi, you know, didn't rise to that and as a sort of -- so, you know, there's sort of apples and oranges. but the fact is she's introduced a new line of criticism against ambassador rice. >> do you think it's relevant, peter -- do you think it's relevant the question that susan collins is now raising as part of, let's say the president did say, i want susan rice as my secretary of state, they have the process, they go before and the senators consider her, do you think it's legitimate, this issue that she's brought up now? >> well, a, it was 14 years ago. b, al qaeda unfortunately wasn't deemed to be a significant threat and, c, it's not even clear that she, you know, was in any way responsible for the lack of, you know, mov
the story, ambassador rice has been under really intense scrutiny for publicly repeating cia talking points that the attack that killed four americans in benghazi, back on september 11th, have been connected to protests against an anti-muslim video. diplomatic e-mails showed within a matter of hour of that attack the assault was linked to terrorists. i with aant to bring in colin l. welcome. we saw senator collins speak on the hill, she was one of several, senator coburn met with her today as well. she actually went back to the bombing in africa and the then assistant secretary of state for african affairs, you know, prior job. take a listen. >> i'm also very troubled by the fact that we seem not to have learned from the 1998 bombings of two of our embassies in africa, at the time when ambassador rice was the assistant secretary for african affairs. >> senator talking about the attacks on both tanzania and kenya, killed 224 people, injured another 4500. and, senator went on to say both cases ambassador begged for additional security. fair criticism? >> that she did beg for additional securi
the unclassified version of the report she was given by the cia? then that would have been criticized. >> you're unfit because you're imparting secrets. >> exactly. >> rice was able to win over someone, joe lieberman. take a listen. >> i would not feel that her appearances and anything she said on those sunday morning talk shows september 16th would disqualify her for appointment to any other office. >> leishman in the context, he's retiring, he's not going to be around to vote on this. but is he signaling for other democrats basically that she has a clear path if her name does come up for nomination? >> i think that's right. joe lieberman is conservative, a hawk, respected by some senators on foreign policy issues. there may be three republican senators who don't like her, another 97 who have votes, the house members who have been campaigning against her don't have votes. something chip said, it would be weird or odd for this process to be playing out if she is not going to be nominated as secretary of state. chip, it shows i think a real political premise on your part, and i think unfortuna
debate. so why aren't they saying, we need more information about the cia? we need to know where was the intelligence failure on the part of cia. that seems to me a very reasonable question as opposed to holding responsible she who went on and repeated what those talking points were saying. >> erin, let me bring you in on this. you heard michael, a laundry list of things they could be asking regarding the investigation but you have susan collins and john mccain willing to endorse john kerry. that may be their sincere and honest opinion but why not answer i'm focused on benghazi and the investigation and not potential nominees for secretary of state, both eager to say they would support john kerry. why? >> well, look. republicans are still looking to punish the administration over benghazi. we know that. republicans think that president obama got a pass on benghazi during the election so there's some of that but one thing i would point out to you from senator collins' remarks is that she is still looking for answers from susan rice about a time in 1998 when she was in charge of th
-up. she knew all the time the cia information that was given to her. >> reporter: senators graham, mccain and ayotte tellingers after yesterday's meeting that the information let them more disturbed and not reassured about rice's benghazi comments that which portrayed the a tack as a demonstration that spun out of control. cia director mike morrell with rice for the meetings initially told her the cia references to dropped in the talking points at the request of the fbi because the bureau did not want to compromise a ongoing criminal investigation. later cia officials called back to correct the record that in fact it was the agency was responsible. there was never any intention to mislead on benghazi rice said in a written statement, the talking points provided by the intelligence community and initial assessment were incorrect in a key respect. there was no protest or demonstration in benghazi. that the white house previousing spokesman jay carney tried to put the focus on the current investigation and not ambassador rice's people are moe interested in talking points for a sunday sho
of the cia and ambassador rice. clearly the impression that was given, the information given to the american people was wrong, in fact, ambassador rice said today, absolutely it was wrong. >> drunk driving -- >> oh, thank you, mike. for sharing that. so ambassador rice -- >> what was that? john heilemann, what did we just say? >> i made a mistake. >> what did we just say and how did they pull kelly ayotte into this trifecta after lieberman starts running for the doors because lieberman is now fine. >> they need a third amigo at all times. >> so -- >> now they have -- now two of the three are women -- now at least one of the three are women. look, they're trying to recover from the -- >> all right, so andrea mitchell, please tell us what you think is going on here. >> well, i certainly do think that there is a proxy fight going on here. i'm not exactly sure what the dynamic is but mccain and graham said they were backing off the ledge so she goes up there thinking it's going to be smoothed over as her, you know, side man she's got the acting director of the cia, mike morale who is widely beli
director of the cia said that the information about the reaction to the video and the protest was wrong and that no one corrected it, including ambassador rice, even though she had left that impression on every single network, op every sunday show. that left me very concerned about that as well. >> did she say to you that she had reviewed intelligence specifically about benghazi, that had the additional information? she couldn't say so publicly. had she reviewed that intelligence? did she affirm that to you or are you assuming that she had? >> she did review it. >> so, in other words, she knew better than what you're saying that she knew better? >> yes. that's one of the questions i have and one of the questions that i didn't feel i got a satisfactory answer to, which is if you knew that even though the classified version, obviously, had references to al qaeda in it being involved or individuals with ties to al qaeda involved in it, how could you not know when you go on every sunday show and not include that fact that it would leave a very different impression to the american people, pa
that caused a problem. it was the acting cia director michael murrell who went with her to this meeting with the three republican senators, told them that it was actually the fbi that changed the unclassified talking points that susan rice used and then really made them mad about that. then hours later called back and said, never mind. we were wrong. so they didn't even -- he didn't even have his facts right in that meeting, which really adds fuel to the fire here. >> okay. and not picking on susan rice but i have to lay this by you. i mean, isn't it part rice's personality the editor at large of foreign policy magazine describes rice this way, quote, she's not easy. i'm not sure i'd want to take her on a picnic with my family, but if the president wants her to be secretary of state, she'll work hard. this is from a reuters article. so is it in part that senators aren't used to dealing with a person -- i mean, susan rice just comes out and kind of says things. she's blunt. she's not charming, warm, etcetera. >> or maybe some might say diplomatic which you need for the role of secretary
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)